Photo: Steve Cooper/GymCastic

Layman’s Summary

In gymnastics, the final score is made up of two main components: difficulty (how difficulty the routine is) and execution (how well the routine is performed). The U.S. men trailed the world in difficulty which largely contributed to them not placing on the podium at a World Championships or Olympic Games from 2015 - 2022. 

In 2022, the U.S. men’s program implemented a bonus system to incentivize male (MAG) athletes to try more difficulty. They did this, in part, because athletes were unmotivated to try more difficulty. The reason? If athletes tried more difficulty, they had higher risk of falling, higher risk of losing their spot on the Senior National Team, and therefore risk of losing funding. 

In 2024, the U.S. men’s team won their first Olympic team medal since 2008. The difficulty bonus program was immediately credited for the success, but no data was shown to support or deny these claims. Our team looked at data from 2018 - 2024 to evaluate the efficacy of the difficulty bonus system. The results were conflicting. Some evidence suggested that the program was successful. For example, when using averages of team difficulty from the 2020 Olympic Cycle (2018 - 2021), compared to averages of team difficulty from the 2024 Olympic Cycle (2022 - 2024), Team USA closed the D score gap by 1.883 points to Japan and China.

However, there was also evidence to suggest that the program may not  have been successful. For example, there was more growth in difficulty during the 2020 Olympic Cycle (pre-bonus system) than there was during the 2024 Olympic Cycle (post bonus system). Additionally, there were no significant changes in the difficulty score gap between the gold medal winning team and Team USA at the 2020 Olympics (-4.2 points) and the 2024 Olympics (-4.0 points). 

There were some surprising findings as well. There is a higher correlation between the difficulty bonus score implementation and the execution scores than there was for the difficulty scores themselves. This could be because athletes had the opportunity to be more comfortable with more difficult routines over time, cut back at the Olympic Games [Note: the U.S. team did not perform their full difficulty in team finals at the 2024 Olympics], and perform somewhat harder routines than their previous baseline with better execution.

Ultimately, it was deemed that there was not enough data post-bonus system implementation to claim that the program was successful or unsuccessful. There were also several limitations that meant direct comparisons of Olympic Cycles should be interpreted with caution. If you want the nitty-gritty, very data-driven analysis, check out the full article below with links to our open-source data. 

Intro

Following the disappointment of a medalless competition at the 2020 Tokyo Olympic Games (which occurred in 2021), the men's program knew they needed to make a change. At the start of the 2024 Olympic cycle, leaders within USA Gymnastics sought solutions to close the difficulty gap to top teams around the world like China and Japan. The United States' achilles heel was their lack of difficulty. At the 2020 Olympic Games, the U.S. were 5.2 points in difficulty behind bronze-medal winners, China. Effectively, this meant that USA would have needed China to fall five times and the U.S. would have had to be perfect just to even the playing field to have a shot at the medal podium.

To address this problem, Olympians Syque Caesar and Kevin Tan submitted a "formula-based system" to increase D score to the Men's Program Committee (MPC) meeting on October 6, 2021. The idea of this system was to allow athletes the opportunity to try harder skills on a big stage without risking losing their spot on the Senior National Team [NOTE: Athletes had communicated their unwillingness to upgrade because if they messed up due to trying harder skills, they could lose their national team funding]. The bonus system was officially implemented for senior athletes at the 2022 Winter Cup in Frisco, Texas; a bonus system was subsequently implemented for juniors at the 2022 U.S. Championships.

The idea for the men's bonus system was to have a full bonus in place for 2022, to use a reduced bonus system in 2023, and to eliminate the bonus system in 2024. With the energy and hope that came with the new bonus system in 2022, came hope of the U.S. men's program returning to the podium at the 2022 World Gymnastics Championships. However, while the bonus program helped the U.S. increase their difficulty, their execution suffered and they finished a disappointing fifth-place. A short two years later at the 2024 Paris Olympic Games, the U.S. team won its first Olympic Team Medal since 2008.

Following Team USA's bronze medal performance at the 2024 Olympic Games, media and members of the men's program immediately credited the D score bonus program for the win. However, statements of this opinion have not been accompanied by publicly available data to substantiate these claims.

Purpose

Therefore, the purpose of this project was to collect and present data over the past two Olympic cycles to determine the effectiveness of the D-score bonus program.The original intention of the project was only to compare team difficulty data from the World Gymnastics Championships and the Olympics Games pre and post-bonus score implementation.

After conflicting findings, the research team expanded the data to include execution data as well. Following conversations with coaches, judges, and athletes, it was determined that national data should be considered to determine whether the D score bonus system had any effect on all-around difficulty as well as individual event difficulty within the United States.

Methods

From November 15 - December 15 2024, three researchers collected data from USA Gymnastics results pages for U.S. National Championships, World Championships, and Olympic Games during 2018, 2019, 2021 (2020 Olympics), 2022, 2023, and 2024 [NOTE: The 2021 World Championships was excluded as it was an individual championships]. We chose to focus on comparing data at major international events (defined as a World Championships and Olympic Games) to allow for a measure of consistency. 

For individual event comparisons (i.e. floor exercise, pommel horse) at international competitions, we chose to only look at qualifying results as they were deemed more relevant than event finals. For team results, we only considered team finals as team performance in qualifications were too varied (i.e. not putting up full 5-4-3 scoring scenarios which drastically skewed the data). Finally, neutral deductions were also not taken into account. 

Data was analyzed in Excel. An ANOVA was run for D score domestic data, E score domestic data, D score international data, and E score international data. A t-test was run to compare averages of the 2020 Olympic cycle (pre-bonus system) to the 2024 Olympic cycle (post-bonus system) for domestic and international competitions.

Indicators that the D Score Bonus System Did Work

International Team Data

When comparing Team USA’s D-score to that of Japan and China, they averaged a deficit of 4.966 points during the 2020 Olympic cycle; in the 2024 Olympic cycle (post D-score bonus system) that average deficit was cut to 3.083 points. When compared to the average D-score of all other major teams (defined as Japan, China, Russia, and Great Britain), Team USA averaged a deficit of 3.917 points during the 2020 Olympic cycle and 2.022 in the 2024 Olympic cycle [Note: Russia did not compete internationally during the 2024 Olympic cycle].

Table 1: D Score Differential from USA to Major Teams at Team World Championships and Olympic Games between 2018 and 2024

National Data

From the 2021 U.S. National Gymnastics Championships to the 2022 U.S. National Gymnastics Championships, the average difficulty score of the top eight all-arounders increased by over half a point (0.669). Comparing 2021 to 2024, the top eight U.S. athletes closed the gap to the top eight athletes in the world on both still rings (0.250) and parallel bars (0.256): that is, the average difficulty score of the top 8 U.S. athletes at national championships was closer to the average difficulty score of the top eight scores in that event in qualifying of that year’s major international competition.

Indicators that the D Score Bonus System Didn't Work

International Team Data

From the first year of the Olympic Cycle (2018) to the final year of the Olympic Cycle (2021), there was a 1.4 increase in D score. In the Olympic cycle when the D score bonus program was implemented (2022-2024), there was only a .3 increase in D score, meaning that more difficulty was added longitudinally in the pre-bonus system era. When comparing the pre-Olympic World Championships to the Olympic Games both the pre-bonus system and post-bonus system championships had an identical increase of .4. When comparing the D-score deficit to the gold medal-winning team at the Olympic Games, the United States' deficit to gold in 2021 was 4.2 points and in 2024, it was 4.0 points exactly.

Table 2: Difficulty Scores among the Top Teams at Team World Championships and Olympic Games between 2018 and 2024

Comparison of International to Domestic Data

In terms of individual events, the U.S. actually increased their deficit to the World on floor exercise and pommel horse. On high bar, there was no significant change; the U.S. athletes only closed the gap to the world by less than a tenth (0.031).

Domestic All-Around Data

There was a decrease in D scores averages among the top eight all-arounders from the 2021 Olympic Trials to the 2024 Olympic Trials.

Surprising Findings

While the purpose of the D-score bonus program was to close the gap in difficulty to the top teams, the program may have had more impact on the execution scores of Team USA. From the 2018 World Championships to the 2020 Olympic Games (in 2021), the U.S. only increased the execution score by 1.2 points; however, from the 2022 World Championships to the 2024 Olympic Games, the U.S. increased their team execution score by over 11 points (11.401). In fact, in 2021, the U.S. had an execution deficit to gold of -4.306, but in 2024, their E score exceeded the gold-medal winning team by 2.199 points.

Additionally, at the 2024 Olympic Games, the U.S. had the highest execution score (153.393) during the Team Final of any team during the entire 2024 Olympic cycle. Including the previous Olympic cycle (2018 - 2020/2021), they had the third-highest execution score of all teams trailing only Russia at the 2019 World Championships and 2020 Olympic Games.

Limitations

• There is not enough data to truly say whether the D score Bonus Program worked or did not work. The bonus system was only implemented for two years. Additionally, all international data from the 2023 World Gymnastics Championships should be considered as outlier data because the competition took place simultaneously with the 2023 Asian Games, meaning that many of the top athletes from China and Japan were not present at the 2023 World Gymnastics Championships

• Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an additional year in the 2020 Olympic Cycle, meaning there was one year less in the 2024 Olympic Cycle. This could result in better preparation with an extra year of training for the 2020 Olympics.

• The format of the 2020 Olympics utilized four-member teams compared to five-member teams in 2024. This could have changed the strategy for team selection.

• There were some changes in the Code of Points from the 2020 Olympic Cycle to the 2024 Olympic Cycle, which means the data is not directly comparable. While scores and routine construction were substantially similar, they were not identical.

• We chose not to compare vault data because few athletes chose to perform two vaults at major national championships

• There are things that are not quantifiable (i.e. do the athletes believe the Bonus System was effective and how did that affect their mindset? Would athletes have sought to compete difficult routines without the bonus system? etc.)

Discussion

First, we will reiterate that no definitive conclusions can be drawn from this data. Effectively, there are two years of data post-bonus system implementation. We believe that international data from 2023 should generally be excluded as a lack of top gymnasts from Japan and China skewed the averages. Despite the lack of data, there is conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of the D-score bonus system.

At the August 19, 2022 MPC Meeting Minutes, Brett McClure stated that the D-score bonus system was working and that athletes were emphasizing difficulty. This was confirmed in our analysis. In 2022, domestic all-around data spiked as the highest among any national championships or Olympic trials between 2018 to 2024. 

In terms of program efficacy, there is also evidence that Team USA closed the gap to Japan and China as intended by an average of 1.883 points in the post-bonus system era. This data should be interpreted with caution considering that 2023 is an outlier year. However, when considering data from the Olympic Games only, Team USA closed the gap to Japan and China by an average of 1.65 points. That being said, there are still some concerning gaps that indicate that the D-score bonus system as-is may not be effective, especially if the men’s program goal for 2028 will be to earn gold on home soil. 

Team USA was only able to close the difficulty gap to the gold-medal winning team by .2 across the two Olympic cycles. Additionally, there was a larger increase in difficulty score across the 2020 Olympic cycle when the difficulty bonus system was not in place than in the 2024 Olympic cycle when the difficulty bonus system was in place. It should be noted that a direct comparison cannot and should not be made due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic meant that the 2020 Olympic cycle was five years while the 2024 Olympic cycle was only three. 

It's plausible that lack of growth across the 2024 cycle was due to the coaches simply understanding the 2022-2024 Code of Points better and thus, being able to more quickly implement effective routine composition. It's also possible that there is a direct correlation between the implemented bonus system and the 2022 D scores, meaning there was simply less room for growth over the Olympic Cycle, because athletes were maxing their difficulty potential at the front end of the cycle. The latter should be seriously considered as all major teams (Japan, China, and Great Britain) decreased difficulty from the 2020 Olympics (in 2021) to the 2022 World Gymnastics Championships. Of the major players, only the U.S. increased their difficulty score from the 2020 Olympics (Tokyo, 2021) to the 2022 World Gymnastics Championships.

One explanation for this observation is that the U.S. athletes had the opportunity to try harder routines with poorer execution without risking their spot on the Senior National Team. This could possibly explain the relationship between high difficulty and low execution present at both the 2022 National Gymnastics Championships and the 2022 World Gymnastics Championships. 

Over the 2024 Olympic cycle, the U.S. barely increased their difficulty, but increased their execution by over eleven points.These results were surprising and potentially an unintended result of the D-score bonus program. Some have argued that the difficulty score increase on the international stage during the 2024 Olympic cycle is misleading because the U.S. did not choose the team with the highest D-score for the 2024 Olympic Games. While that is accurate, the argument of "what-ifs" should not be considered viable. For example, in both the 2020 Olympics (Tokyo, 2021) and the Paris 2024 Olympics, China also did not send a team with the highest possible D-score–one year due to politics and the other due to injury. Hypothetical arguments can be given all day, but shouldn’t be deemed valid in a decision-making process.

Conclusions and Future Recommendations

While there is no conclusive evidence that the bonus program worked exactly as the men's program intended, there is also no evidence that it was hurtful to the program's goals. In fact, some evidence suggests the program was an overall positive.

We suggest that the men's program continue to implement the bonus system for the 2028 Olympic cycle with a few tweaks. If the goal of the program is gold on home soil, they need to be more radical in their approach. For example, the men's program could consider keeping the bonus program at full difficulty through the 2028 Winter Cup. This would provide a difficulty buffer up until the competition(s) where the Olympic Team would be selected, at which point, no bonus system should be in place. This would be inline with alleviating the MPC's concern that lowering the D-score bonus value would not be incentive enough to have athletes push the difficulty. Yet, it would still have an impact on the pool of athletes in the Olympic Team selection process as Winter Cup may be the final qualifier to the 2028 U.S. National Gymnastics Championships. 

The MPC also stated that they were open to refining their system. Should this be a route that they explore, we would also suggest that the men's program gradually make the bonus system dependent upon execution. Instead of gradually decreasing the the bonus system over the years as they did from 2022 to 2024, they could have no execution (E) contingencies in 2025, an 8.0 E contingincy in 2026, an 8.3 contingency in 2027, and an 8.5 E contingency in 2028 [Note: This could of course be modified per events as vaults have higher execution scores generally than other events like pommel horse].

It should also be considered that perhaps a D score bonus system may not be enough. I, Kensley, have long-argued that with only a few exceptions, the timing of the NCAA season is detrimental to upgrades. The men's program could consider other radical options like sitting out the "A-team" athletes for the individual 2025 World Championships to give them time to upgrade. Or, they could consider taking a page out of the women's program playbook and having NCAA athletes in consideration for the Olympic Team sit out the 2027-2028 NCAA season and train at their home gym or even a central location.

It is important to consider the benefits and potential problems that arose from the first iteration of the D-score bonus system. As of now, the MPC plans to implement an almost identical approach that they did during the 2022 - 2024 Olympic Cycle. The only difference is: this time, there will be one more year in the Olympic Cycle for growth. 

Data Sets

We have chosen to make our data sets open-source and available for all to view. Find the data for this article below.

Men's Program D score comparison of major teams at the World Championships and Olympic Games

Men's Program E score comparison of major teams at the World Championships and Olympic Games

U.S. Men's Program Top-8 AA Domestic Data

Comparison of International and National Floor Exercise Data

Comparison of International and National Pommel Horse Data

Comparison of International and National Still Rings Data

Comparison of International and National Parallel Bars Data

Comparison of International and National High Bar Data

Article by: Kensley Behel

Data contributions by: Yaroslav Owens-Pochinka and Kaitlyn Simmons

Help Support Men's Gymnastics Coverage

This coverage is not possible without your help! Please support men's gymnastics coverage with a donation via Paypal or Stripe. (NOTE: Stripe will show up at Musicians' Health Lab Inc. Neutral Deductions is a DBA of that entity).

Your financial contributions are necessary to help cover website maintenance and hosting, operational costs, travel cost for live reporting of meets. The anticipated cost of our expenses is $4,000 for the season. We have received $3,469 dollars in donations to date (12/18/2024). If you have any questions about your donations, please feel free to email us a neutraldeductions@gmail.com.